All Issue

2025 Vol.58, Issue 4 Preview Page

Short communication

Variation of soil physical properties of greenhouse fields in Chungbuk Province from 2016 to 2024
Mejee Jin1*
,
Juhee Yu1
,
Minja Kim2
,
Juhyoung Kim2
,
Seungoh Hur3
1Researcher, Chungcheongbuk-do Agricultural Research & Extension Services, Cheongju 28130, Korea
2Senior Researcher, Chungcheongbuk-do Agricultural Research&Extension Services, Cheongju 28130, Korea
3Senior Research, Soil and water environment Division, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, RDA, Wanju 55365, Korea
*Corresponding Author
30 November 2025. pp. 599-606
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

Soil physical property monitoring is conducted in accordance with the Rural Development Administration’s notice (2017-12) in Korea, as mandated by the Framework Act on the Promotion of Environment-Friendly Agriculture and Fisheries and the Management of and Support for Organic Foods, etc. This study aimed to analyze the physical characteristics and temporal changes of greenhouse soils in Chungbuk province, based on soil physical property surveys conducted every four years from 2016 to 2024. The main soil series identified in the region were Gangseo and Gocheon, predominantly distributed in fluvial plains, with subsoil (soil below plowing depth) textures mainly consisting of sandy loam. Since 2016, the plow layer depth has shown a decreasing trend, while organic matter content in the subsoil has increased. The bulk density of the subsoil decreased from 1.45 Mg m-3 in 2016 to 1.40 Mg m-3 in 2024, indicating that the physical properties of greenhouse soils have been appropriately maintained. However, as of 2024, 22.5% of the sites still exhibited subsoil bulk densities exceeding 1.5 Mg m-3, suggesting the need for continuous soil improvement practices to enhance soil physical properties.

Soil physical properties of greenhouse soils by years.
Year Soil layer PD1 (cm) BD2 (Mg m-3) Porosity (%) Hardness (mm) OM3 (g kg-1)
2016 TS4 32.5 (9.9) 1.21 (0.2) 54.5 (5.8) 37.6 (15.8)
SS5 1.45 (0.2) 45.3 (7.0) 16.7 (4.4) 21.8 (11.0)
2020 TS 30.3 (8.4) 1.23 (0.2) 53.7 (5.7) 32.0 (11.3)
SS 1.42 (0.1) 46.5 (4.6) 14.4 (3.8) 21.2 (11.9)
2024 TS 27.1 (7.0) 1.15 (0.1) 56.5 (5.0) 33.4 (15.3)
SS 1.40 (0.1) 47.1 (5.0) 16.0 (2.8) 26.7 (15.6)

1PD, plowing depth;

2BD, bulk density;

3OM, organic matter;

4TS, topsoil;

5SS, sub-surface soil.

Data are means (standard deviation).

Keywords
Bulk density
Chungbuk province
Greenhouse soil
References
1

Alakukku L. 2000. Responses of annual crops to subsoil compaction in a field experiment in clay soil lasting 17 years. pp. 205-208. In Horn et al. (Eds.) Subsoil compaction: Distribution, processes and consequences. Advances in GeoEcology 32. Catena Verlag, Reiskirchen, Germany.

2

Amorim HCS, Ashworth AJ, Moore Jr. PA , Wienhold BJ, Savin MC, Owens PR, Jagadamma S, Carvalho RS, Xu S. 2020. Soil quality indices following long-term conservation pasture management practices. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 301:107060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.107060

10.1016/j.agee.2020.107060
3

Carter MR, Gregorich EG, Anderson DW, Doran JW, Janzen HH, Pierce FJ. 1997. Concepts of soil quality and their significance. In: Soil quality for crop production and ecosystem health. Elsevier. 25:1-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-2481(97)80028-1

10.1016/S0166-2481(97)80028-1
4

Cho HR, Cho HJ, Jung KY, Ryu JH, Ha SG, Han KH, Jeon SH, Jeon HJ, No AS, Lim SJ, et al. 2010. Soil physical properties under different arable land use types. pp. 139-140. In proceedings of the 2010 Korean Soil & Fertility Conference, Gyeongbuk, Korea.

5

Cho HR, Zhang YS, Han KH, Cho HJ, Ryu JH, Jung KY, Cho KR, Ro AS, Lim SJ, Choi SC, et al. 2012. Soil physical properties of arable land by land use across the country. Korean J. Soil Sci. Fert. 45:344-352. https://doi.org/10.7745/KJSSF.2012.45.3.344.

10.7745/KJSSF.2012.45.3.344
6

Dexter AR, Czyz EA, Birkás M, Diaz-Pereira E, Dumitru E, Enache R, Fleige H, Horn R, Rajkaj K, De La Rosa D, et al. 2005. SIDASS project, Part 3. The optimum and the range of water content for tillage-further developments. Soil Tillage Res. 82:29-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2005.01.005

10.1016/j.still.2005.01.005
7

Dexter AR. 2004. Soil physical quality. Part I. Theory, effects of soil texture, density, and organic matter, and effects on root growth. Geoderma 120:201-214.

10.1016/j.geoderma.2003.09.004
8

Lee SB, Choi WA, Hong SG, Park KL, Lee CR, Kim SC, An MS. 2015. Physical properties of organic vegetable cultivation soils under plastic greenhouse. Korean J. Org. Agric. 23:963-974. http://dx.doi.org/10.11625/KJOA.2015.23.4.963

10.11625/KJOA.2015.23.4.963
9

NAS (National Institute of Agricultural Science). 2008. Study on soil physical properties of soil compaction. Agricultural Environment research Report. RDA, Wanju, Korea.

10

NAS (National Institute of Agricultural Science). 2012. Development of water management technique for water saving. Agricultural Environment research Report. RDA, Jeonju, Korea. 2011:1138-1215.

11

NAS (National Institute of Agricultural Science). 2021. Monitoring project on agri-environment quality for 22 years in Korea. RDA, Wanju, Korea.

12

NAS (National Institute of Agricultural Science). 2022. Survey and analysis methods for soil physical properties of agricultural land. National Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology, RDA, Jeonju, Korea.

13

Obade VDP, Lal R. 2016. A standardized soil quality index for diverse field condition. Sci. Total Environ. 541: 424-434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.09.096

10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.09.096
14

OECD. 1999. Environmental indicators for agriculture: Vol. 1. Concepts and framework. Paris, France.

15

Oliver DP, Bramley RGV, Riches D, Porter I, Edwards J. 2013. Review: Soil physical and chemical properties as indicators of soil quality in Australian viticulture. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 19:129-139. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajgw.12016

10.1111/ajgw.12016
16

Raper RL. 2005. Agricultural traffic impacts on soil. J. Terramech. 42:259-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jterra.2004.10.010

10.1016/j.jterra.2004.10.010
17

Schoenholtz SH, Van Miegroet H, Burger JA. 2000. A review of chemical and physical properties as indicators of forest soil quality: Challenges and opportunities. For. Ecol. Manage. 138:335-356. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00423-0

10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00423-0
18

Slavich P. 2001. Soil health: a systems approach to soils. pp. 2-7. In: Soil health: thefoundation of sustainable agriculture. In proceedings of a Workshop on theImportance of Soil Health in Agriculture, Wolongbar, NSW, Australia.

19

Soane BD. 1990. The role of organic matter in soil compactibility: A review of some practical aspects. Soil Tillage Res. 16:179-201.

10.1016/0167-1987(90)90029-D
20

Voorhees WB. 2000. Long term effects of subsoil compaction on yield of maize. pp. 331-338. In Horn R et al. (Eds.) Subsoil compaction: Distribution, processes and consequences. Advances in GeoEcology 32. Catena Verlag, Reiskirchen, Germany.

21

Yoon JH. 2004. Review and discussion on development of soil quality indicators. Korean J. Soil Sci. Fert. 37:192-198.

22

Zhang YH, Cho HR, Han KH, Ok JH, Hwang SA, Jung KH. 2018. Optimum range on soil physical indicators under plastic film house. Korean J. Soil Sci. Fert. 51:445-456. https://doi.org/10.7745/KJSSF.2018.51.4.445

10.7745/KJSSF.2018.51.4.445
Information
  • Publisher :Korean Society of Soil Science and Fertilizer
  • Publisher(Ko) :한국토양비료학회
  • Journal Title :Korean Journal of Soil Science and Fertilizer
  • Journal Title(Ko) :한국토양비료학회 학회지
  • Volume : 58
  • No :4
  • Pages :599-606
  • Received Date : 2025-07-28
  • Revised Date : 2025-08-26
  • Accepted Date : 2025-09-13
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.7745/KJSSF.2025.58.4.599
Journal Informaiton Korean Journal of Soil Science and Fertilizer Korean Journal of Soil Science and Fertilizer
KJSSF Online Submission
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • crossref crossmark
  • crossref cited-by
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close